Abstract
Background Cardiac arrest is common in people admitted with suspected COVID-19 and has a poor prognosis. Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) orders can reduce the risk of futile resuscitation attempts but have raised ethical concerns.
Objectives We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of adults admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19 according to their DNAR status and identify factors associated with an early DNAR decision.
Methods We undertook a secondary analysis of 13977 adults admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19 and included in the Pandemic Respiratory Infection Emergency System Triage (PRIEST) study. We recorded presenting characteristics and outcomes (death or organ support) up to 30 days. We categorised patients as early DNAR (occurring before or on the day of admission) or late/no DNAR (no DNAR or occurring after the day of admission). We undertook descriptive analysis comparing these groups and multivariable analysis to identify independent predictors of early DNAR.
Results We excluded 1249 with missing DNAR data, and identified 3929/12748 (31%) with an early DNAR decision. They had higher mortality (40.7% v 13.1%) and lower use of any organ support (11.6% v 15.7%), but received a range of organ support interventions, with some being used at rates comparable to those with late or no DNAR (e.g. non-invasive ventilation 4.4% v 3.5%). On multivariable analysis, older age (p<0.001), active malignancy (p<0.001), chronic lung disease (p<0.001), limited performance status (p<0.001), and abnormal physiological variables were associated with increased recording of early DNAR. Asian ethnicity was associated with reduced recording of early DNAR (p=0.001).
Conclusions Early DNAR decisions were associated with recognised predictors of adverse outcome, and were also associated with Asian ethnicity. Most people with an early DNAR decision survived to 30 days and many received potentially life-saving interventions.
Registration ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN28342533, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533
Competing Interest Statement
All authors declare grant funding to their employing institution from the National Institute for Health Research.
Clinical Trial
http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533
Clinical Protocols
http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/research/centres/cure/priest
https://www.fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/11/46/07
Funding Statement
The PRIEST study was funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project reference 11/46/07). The funder played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee (REC) gave a favourable opinion on the PAINTED study on 25 June 2012 (reference 12/NW/0303) and on the updated PRIEST study on 23rd March 2020. The Confidentiality Advisory Group of the Health Research Authority granted approval to collect data without patient consent in line with Section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006. The REC approved a substantial amendment to undertake this secondary analysis on 7 January 2021.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Anonymised data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request
